I'd say the odds of a Sarah Palin press conference just got that much slimmer.

She's already been holding press conferences, makes herself available informally, and had an interview on CNN.
Get with the times, Ezra.

I don't see how this story is weird. It seems very standard to me.

Can you give me a link to one of her press conferences?

what world does kaybeel live in where stealing $150,000 of other people's money to finance a cashmere splurge at Saks Fifth Avenue is called "very standard"?

Coupla weeks ago I saw a commenter's post on a blog (can't recall which, sorry) in which the poster claimed to be a high-end fashion consultant. The consultant asserted that he/she had been watching Palin's public appearances closely, and noted that the governor rarely repeats and outfit, and that every one of them was absolutely up-to-date fashion-wise, and all from expensive designers -- not a stitch from last year's collection. The consultant concluded that, up to that point, Governor Palin must've gone through upwards of $200K worth of clothes. This report seems to pretty well verify that.

Hoodathunkit that the RNC decided that now was the time to heed King George's advice to fight the war on terror by going shopping?

You've got to love how they've spent more on her clothes than the current value of many people's homes. As such, the Obama campaign should definitely exploit this for all it's worth.

The
Electoral College and Unemployment

i never thought i'd say this, but i long for the days of the Hillary Clinton pantsuit.

Clinton knew how to dress well without stealing $150,000 of other people's money to finance a cashmere splurge at Saks Fifth Avenue.

I kind of wish I could get outraged by this, in the same way that right-wingers were able to whip-themselves into a froth over a $400 bill sent to John Edward's hair-cutter, but I can't. Campaign events are highly-staged dramatic productions, and I completely understand that these productions have a significant costuming budget associated with them.

This just reminds me how, during a discussion of the limits of anti-French sentiment in the USA, someone said something along the lines of, "Look, at the end of the day, on a special occasion, Americans don't go out for dinner at a fancy Scottish restaurant."

Yeah, Palin likes to complain about the value of the "elites" in their "big cities," but when push comes to shove, she's going to outfit herself with the finest clothes from the big-city retail stores that carries clothing from the fanciest, cos-mo-pol-i-tan designers.

sarah palin is reese witherspoon. she uses her "down homey" roots as a way to simultaneously distance herself from Hollywood while fully embracing it. does anyone doubt that Sarah Palin is going to move out to LA/DC/NY as soon as her term as governor is up?

My initial reaction, since I was thinking about how the economy wants more shoppers now, was "oh, good, at least someone's spending money."

It's not on the same level as her using state funds to attend church services.

"I kind of wish I could get outraged by this, in the same way that right-wingers were able to whip-themselves into a froth over a $400 bill sent to John Edward's hair-cutter, but I can't."

Nor can I, of course, but I do think it rather stupid of the McCain campaign to do something as easily exploitable as this. If Obama needed further ammunition for "McCain is out of touch" theme, he sure got it.

One thing I'm curious about: will Drudge pick this up? This is tailormade for his brand of slime. If it were Clinton or Obama, he'd be all over it.

There's nothing, I think, more frustrating for fashion types (like me) than hearing blithe descriptions of shopping sprees as "cashmere splurges". She's not buying cashmere. It's hot, and it doesn't serve her purposes. She is, as has been noted, been wearing Armani, and lots of it. Which, it occurred to me, wasn't cheap - but I figured she was paying herself.

I suspect the real culprit here is Cindy McCain - she's got great taste, and expensive taste, too, and it's been hinted that she did a Palin makeover. Palin's got a great figure and she wears her suits well (which also suggests good tailoring on top of her purchases), which generally costs money. I don't begrudge the urge to look good, and let's remember, Nancy Pelosi wears Armani as well - it's hard to know just how much of the reaction to this will be about class resentments, and upper class tastes, rather than the fact that it was paid for by the campaign (which, really, is the campaign's choice, isn't it?). I agree, it's not going to help her "just folks" persona... but since I didn't buy that to begin with, I'm hardly in shock.

"what world does kaybeel live in where stealing $150,000 of other people's money to finance a cashmere splurge at Saks Fifth Avenue is called 'very standard'?"
Well, the good folks who ran AIG into the ground used their bailout money to immediately schedule a corporate retreat at a luxury hotel, because that's what they were used to doing with their shareholders' funds (when they weren't going hunting in England). So it's probably that world.

However, I must say that Palin's hair does look great. She certainly has some grey hair, and all hair dims after 40, so the shine and the gleams of gold are expertly done.

Palin's got a great figure

Not quite.

There's nothing, I think, more frustrating for fashion types (like me) than hearing blithe descriptions of shopping sprees as "cashmere splurges".

I think that means you fail at life.

For $150,000 they could have gone out and hired a better candidate.

It was reported Cindy McCain wore a $400K outfit to the convention - you have to have known the priority of these folks.

Ezra,

You asked for a link to one of her press conferences. The only press conference she has held was in CO. Sullivan has links to the reporting on it:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/a-press-confere.html

And now the AP story on improper taxpayer funded travel for her family, complete with puffed up expense claims.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/10/john-mccain--19.html

Stick a fork in 'er. She's D-U-N done.

Ezra- here's a link to CBS's coverage regarding her press conferences
http://tinyurl.com/642nnr

the world's best-dressed megalomaniac.
did you hear the things she said today?

G-d help us,
and keep working to get every single democrat to vote as soon as possible.

"what world does kaybeel live in where stealing $150,000 of other people's money to finance a cashmere splurge at Saks Fifth Avenue is called 'very standard'?"

I guess in the same world where you can "steal" other people's money to buy yourself a posh private plane to fly around in, with a nice first class comfort zone separate from the other passengers. The same world where you can fly yourself to Europe. The same world where you can take your family to the Grand Canyon to film for a few hours.
The campaign world.

if politics doesnt continue to work out for sarah palin, she can still have a great career in televangelism.
(and the new wardrobe to go with it.)

How much do you think it costs to design a logo and have it painted on an airplane?

Michelle Obama's not exactly shopping at Walmart. The Maria Pinto purple silk crepe sheath she wore for the infamous fist bump moment - $900 retail. The Thakoon dress she wore the night of Obama's speech at Mile High Stadium - $1,250 retail. She shops at Ikram, one of the most expensive boutiques in Chicago. She wears belts by Azzedine Alaia, which start at about $600 each. She wears necklaces by Tom Binns, which also start at around $600 and can run as high as $20K.

Does she pay for her clothes out of her own pocket, or does the campaign pay for them? I have no idea. If I had to guess, I'd say it was a combination of both.

Needless to say, nothing I want to get outraged about, anymore than I can get outraged about campaign planes. I would imagine that when Sen. Obama takes off for Hawaii on Thursday, he won't be flying commercial. Who cares - it's his campaign money to blow however he wants.

one white chocolate mocha trumps two live steamed lobsters.

I was just reading a Vogue excerpt gushing about Michelle Obama's sense of style.
They showed a picture from some plain old rally, where she was wearing a Thakoon dress. Those retail for $1,200 minimum. If you add jewellery, hair, makeup, shoes, etc., I'm sure she ran up a similar amount, within the same time period.
It's fine if you agree with Obama's policies more than McCain's. But let's not be petty. Both campaigns spend a lot to keep up appearances, and Palin needed money from the RNC because she did not already have a fancy wardrobe, as she is not wealthy (or at least not nearly as wealthy as are the Obamas). It is even possible that the Obama campaign used some money toward Michelle's wardrobe. We don't know, and it doesn't matter. I wish human beings weren't wired to care so much about looks, but that is simply not the case. It's inappropriate to twist every anectode into an opportunity to take a dig at one's not preferred candidate.

I'm correcting myself because I just noticed that the Thakoon dress was worn at the big candidate acceptance rally. My point still stands.

weboy: "There's nothing, I think, more frustrating for fashion types (like me) than hearing blithe descriptions of shopping sprees as "cashmere splurges". She's not buying cashmere."

i stand corrected.

,i>kaybeel: "How much do you think it costs to design a logo and have it painted on an airplane?"

it's called advertising. for all the money I donated money to the Obama campaign they better design a good logo and splash it everywhere they can. planes are transportation so the candidate can get around. again, this is a proper use of my money. If Michelle Obama had used $150,000 worth of campaign funds to buy extremely expensive clothing from Saks Fifth Avenue, that's inappropriate and i would be really pissed off.

And no, the Obama campaign does not buy Michelle Obama's wardrobe. We know this because campaign expenses are itemized and disclosed to the FEC, which is how the press found out about the Edwards haircuts and the Palin dresses.

I'm actually sympathetic to Tyro's point above. But there's a costuming budget and there's going ridiculously overboard. Sure, spend a few thousand dollars on makeup. 150k in Armani dresses (thanks weboy) for a sitting governor who already has clothes--that's unprecedented. Not standard, unprecedented.

Even CW weathervane Marc Ambinder says: "This sort of spending is without precedent -- the closest approximation for any campaign I've ever covered is make-up expenses for television interviews and commercial shoots -- , and Schmitt's weakly defensive response tonight indicates that the campaign is deeply embarrassed by it and has nothing to say in their defense."

That good enough for you, kaybeel?

P.S. The next question we need to ask is this: did Sarah Palin know about this? Was she even, perhaps, the one who bought all the clothes? I don't know but it'll be fun to find out.

michelle obama does not look like a woman of lavish taste or ostentation.
she looks like someone who walks the walk, in terms of raising and protecting her daughters and in knowing the value of a dollar.
she seems like a woman who would rather be judged by her emotional and intellectual substance, honesty and character, rather than her sense of style.

Image is important in politics, and noone here is questioning the expenses that went towards makeup, so the candidate looks good on TV. As far as I know, all the candidates spend money this way. I'm not against spending campaign money on costuming the candidates, either, though I think this is not nearly so precedented. But the amount here is just nuts: they've spent enough on clothes to have a different $2000 outfit for each day of the campaign. I can imagine that her suits that sufficed to run for and serve as governor just weren't sharp enough for this campaign. She has rather a fancy income, but she's got five kids and is planning a wedding; maybe the sensible way to kit her up fast was on the campaign's (and the taxpayer's!) dime - but 60 outfits? She can't get them dry cleaned? And revealed at the same time as we learn about yet mor perquisites she's availed herself of - and not paid taxes on. Her nomination is the Worst Campaign Stunt Ever.

I suspect the real culprit here is Cindy McCain - she's got great taste...

Well, I guess I'll defer to you on this since you clearly know more than I do about women's fashion.

I dunno. Just my opinion, I guess, but the only "CMcC fashion moment" that really sticks in my mind are those ghastly puffy-out dresses she wore during the convention. What are they called? "Baby-doll"? They puff all out below her waist.

She looked just plain ridiculous in them. Kinda reminded me of Bette Davis in "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?"

But whadda I know?

Ohh yeah, those cunts and there clothes.

Bros before Hoes all the way Ezra!

We don't needin no Bush in the white house. Just think once a month she'll be in the mood to Nuke Iran just because she's raggin.

Here's another good one for the he-man women haters club.

What do you tell a women with two black eyes?

Nothing, you told the bitch twice already!

Michelle ain't wearin no rags when she dines with Mrs Khadijah Farrakhan.

You have to dress nice to cater to the Jew haters.

http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/8853/obamafarrakhanetalmm9.jpg

Funny, I don't see no mud people in the picture..must be an exclusive club.

Its going to be a real treat to see the Farrakhans invited to the White House.

How is making fun of a women love of clothes, make-up and jewelry any different than making fun of Obama and his love of fried chicken, watermelon and ribs?

Ezra simply doesn't recognize the great struggle women have gone through in this country that kept them repressed and oppressed for centuries.
Women were considered second class citizens, they couldn't vote, they couldn't own property without a mans permission, they were raped, beaten and killed and the country stood by and watched. They have been abused by horrible men and society...so Ezra decides to heap on further abuse.

What's next, you going to make fun of how Asian people talk?

one had to have watched mika brezhinski ad chrysta freedland this morning... in one breath, commenting on the surge in unemployment and the global economic plight, and in the next breath, defending the campaign money used on sarah palin's extreme makeover.
.....it made me think a lot less of mika brezhinski.
and isnt sarah palin the woman with the "no-frills" sittin' round the kitchen table, hockey mom persona, who charmed the heartland two weeks ago, with her "real women kill moose" handbag and now wont be seen in public without a silkblend armani suit?
that didnt take long at all.
mika brezhinski and chrysta freedland , cindy mccain and also, sarah palin are hypocritically out of touch with the concerns and fears of most women in this country right now. who would be more than pleased to give them beauty and wardrobe tips for less....
defending a campaign spending this amount of money on her clothes at this time, is as spiritually and ethically bankrupt as defending aig executives at a time when people are fearful and hurting.

This is hilarious, the Republicans waste $150K of their donors' money doing over Sarah "Authentic Hockey Mom" Palin, right smack in the middle of the worst financial crisis since the Depression, and the trolls come rushing into Ezra Klein's blog to make excuses for her.

Have you suckers donated some of your cash to McCain/Palin and the RNC? And you're happy about this? You see, we liberals have been trying to figure you folks out during the past few years: why you support, with your votes and donations, a Republican power structure whose primary course of action has been to enrich itself at your expense? What's the matter with Kansas? What is the matter with you people?

Look, if you insist on throwing away your money, would you send it to me instead? Believe me, sending me your money will be about exactly as useless to you, and to the well-being of your families and our country, as sending it to Republican political organizations has been.

If you really think that Palin is that awesome, would you please nominate her for President in 2012? I'm beginning to envision the ultimate demise of the GOP in our lifetimes, and a Palin candidacy in four years could conceivably make it happen. It may seem like Democrats and Republicans have always existed and always will, but political parties are not permanent fixtures in history -- after all, the first parties in US history were already gone by about 1820. Will Republicans disappear in 2020? Nothing is impossible!

Palin/Bachmann in 2012! Go for it!

Oops, left out an HTML closing tag up there, the italics were not meant to go on that long. Sorry about all the shouting.

Jacki...noone is spending more money to buy this election then Barack aka 'Barry' Obama.

If any Republican had Obamas dirty money trail the media would be doingh daily full front page stories on how corrupting money is in politics.

I'm no Palin fan, but seriously, don't underestimate how judgemental the world is about a woman who doesn't dress well. And the kind of TV-genic professional-looking well-dressed required of a VP candidate by today's standards is well beyond the Palins' income bracket. I don't think the pile-on here is entirely fair.

Also, Obama supporters should be thrilled that the McCain campaign has spent 150K on clothes. That's 150K not going to TV ads and robocalls! I'm 100% in favour of Palin getting her couture on.

"no-one is spending more money to buy this election than barack."

i think you are a little confused.

no-one is spending more money to buy this election than concerned citizens trying to take back their country, by choosing to give him this money, and work for his campaign.

this election has been bought, paid for and supported by his contributors.

at least she's not billing it to the people of Alaska!

Seriously: is it standard practice for the RNC or DNC to pay for a candidate's wardrobe? I can see the campaign fronting to replace a stained tie or ripped jacket, but I would think clothing would be a personal item.

And even if you could make a case that this is just a normal expense, to also pay for all FIVE of her kids?

I agree: if I had scraped together $20 to send to the RNC, this isn't how I would have imagined them spending my money.

The Obamas and Pelosis are very affluent and the McCains are filthy rich. Nobody is claiming otherwise. Sarah Palin is the one whose whole public persona is based on being a regular ol' middle class anti-elitist housewife. With a wardrobe worth something like 3X the median family's annual income.

I encourage all of you who are defending these expenditures to enter the lucrative field of Republican campaign consulting. With your sage advice and insight into the average American voter, there's no doubt that your GOP candidate will cruise to victory in even the bluest districts.

@kaybeel

And Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

I think y'all are missing the point here. It's not that the money was spent, or even where it came from. Heck, if the RNC wants to spend money on her clothes rather than on another negative Obama ad, that's fine and dandy with me. It's the fact that Palin tries to paint herself as the average American, hocky mom, Jane Six Pack (God, I hate that phrase - I hope it dies an ignominous death and never rises from the ashes again after McCain loses), and then gets $150,000 in new clothes, which, as someone rightly point out above, is more than the value of many average Americans' homes! This is pure and simple hypocrisy, and nothing else but. I hope she gets skewered for it.

Jacki,
And Bill Clintons coffees for Chinese nationals were just get to know you sessions. And hundreds of foriegners didn't flee the country when questions started to be axed.

Obama is the only candididate that refuses to publicly release his donors, period.

Now if they just a bunch of poor old folk trying to help...I would think he wouldn't have a problem releasing the info. The fact he doesn't release it says alot more about him and how he will govern.

Why we just have to trust Obama that everything is on the up and up...we don't need to see the facts, we'll just take his word that William Ayers was just a guy from Da Hood, and Khalidi was just an acquintance, and Al_Mansour was just a man helping out a college student, and Rev Wright was just some guy I totally disagree with but happen to accidently attend, donate to and have him as a mentor, and Rezko was just some guy who helped me by my mansion.

The Obamas and Pelosis are very affluent and the McCains are filthy rich.

Not to mention that they all paid for their own clothes.

As I said, I'm sympathetic: while none of Palin's pictures from Alaska make it seem like she is lacking professional clothes, it's perfectly plausible that some members of the McCain campaign took her aside and decided to give her a wardrobe they felt was "campaign appropriate." On the other hand, if it turns out that she took the RNC credit card and used it to go on a shopping spree, then we have something a little more serious here. If she's using the RNC to pad her personal lifestyle the same way she used the state of Alaska, we've got something a bit more serious here.

Jacqueline,
Obama screwed up and accidently releassed info on some of thoese small donors when they kept matching the same name..and this is what we discovered:

Illegal Obama donors: Middle Eastern Arabs
Gazan brothers' illicit contributions listed in government campaign filings

JERUSALEM – Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip are listed in Obama election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama's campaign.

Donations of this nature violate election laws, including prohibitions on receiving contributions from foreigners and guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election, Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission.

The contributions also raise numerous questions about the Obama campaign's lax online donation form, which allows for foreign contributions.

Obama's campaign site, the Palestinians listed their street as "Tal Esaltan," which they wrote was located in "Rafah, GA."

Rafah is not a city in Georgia but a Hamas controlled town in the Gaza Strip.

The Palestinians made 20 donations ranging from $717 to $2017.50 to hide the transaction as violating election law.

Yeah, just ordinary Palestinian folk thinking Obama is going to, what did you say....''Take back their country'''

This is pure and simple hypocrisy, and nothing else but.

First, I don't think that hypocrisy has much pull on the voting public. Next, Palin's always presented herself as "the small-town girl who managed to succeed by living well off the fruits of her political success." Implicit in the shopping spree and the per diems and the state of Alaska being billed for her family's travel is the message that this is her way of "sticking it to the man."

Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip are listed in Obama election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama's campaign.

Barack Obama's campaign, having better, more responsible accounting practices than, say, the RNC, was able to detect this set of fraudulent donations and returned them to those donors, as reported recently in Newsweek.

Thanks for playing.

But, hey, if you know something we don't, maybe the FEC would like to know, and they could prosecute Obama for something. They seem to know nothing about any violations of the law.

It is a real hoot that the left is MORE concerned that the AMERICAN RNC is buying clothes at an AMERICAN store for an AMERICAN candidate, then they are that FORIENGERS are donating tens of thopusands of dollars to the Obama campaign.

The DNC could have had these expenditures, but as we all know, the Democrats rejected the most qualified women in favor of a green, untested, first term nobody from the extreme left wing of the party who then choose a befuddled old dude who doesn't even know Obama is his running mate and goes around the country telling everyone were going to face another Nuclear stand-off like Kennedy if you elect his runing amte.

Wrong Tyro,
Obama reported the donations to the FEC, when caught by them, then they paid the money back.

Same as these frauds:
Consider the cases of Obama donors "Doodad Pro" of Nunda, N.Y., who gave $17,130, and "Good Will" of Austin, Texas, who gave more than $11,000—both in excess of the $2,300-per-person federal limit. In two recent letters to the Obama campaign, Federal Election Commission auditors flagged those (and other) donors and informed the campaign that the sums had to be returned. Neither name had ever been publicly reported because both individuals made online donations in $10 and $25 increments. "Good Will" listed his employer as "Loving" and his occupation as "You," while supplying as his address 1015 Norwood Park Boulevard, which is shared by the Austin nonprofit Goodwill Industries. Suzanha Burmeister, marketing director for Goodwill, said the group had "no clue" who the donor was. She added, however, that the group had received five puzzling thank-you letters from the Obama campaign this year, prompting it to send the campaign an e-mail in September pointing out the apparent fraudulent use of its name.

THE PROBLEM HERE IS OBAMA IS HIDING THE INFO, THE ONLY REASON HE REPORTED THESE TO THE FEC IS BECAUSE THE CRIMINALS WERE STUPID ENOUGH TO KEEP USING THE SAME FALSE NAME, THUS PUTTING THEM OVER THE LIMIT.

But how many others weren't this stupid? And as I said, why not just release it all, why hide it from the public scrutiny??

Well, as I said, TooStupidToUseAPseudonym: get the FEC involved. You seem to have some firm evidence of illegality that I'm sure they'd like to know about.

Meanwhile, why is the VP using the RNC's budget to serve as her personal expense account? The problem with Republicans is their implicit belief in class warfare: that the job of hoi polloi among its donor base exists specifically to support and enhance the lifestyle of their politicians.

Ok, so it isn't standard. I know, however, that whoever wins, their party will be paying for a hair and makeup artist for the women for the rest of their days in office.
It's different for women than it is for men.

it's called advertising. for all the money I donated money to the Obama campaign they better design a good logo and splash it everywhere they can.

Having Palin look good is advertising, too. People were waiting for her to look like a podunk mayor out on the campaign trail, unready to face the world.

As for people being outraged that this money was spent-in this economy!- keep in mind Obama's campaign is spending unprecedented amounts of money, none of it on you either. So that outrage seems a bit unrealistic.
All the money spent, even at retail, does go into the economy though.

Gov. Palin could have save the RNC and its donors approx $149,000 just by asking Tina Fey where she bought her Sarah Palin costumes.

for all of our sakes,
while sarah palin buys her beautiful, new wardrobe, may the democrats just keep voting in vast and devoted number, and the lawyers and poll watchers just keep watching....and may barack obama walk in victory.
Amen

Having Palin look good is advertising, too.

I truly sympathize with this POV (and, women's professional fashions are much more complicated than men's), but the thing is that this move is relatively unprecedented. It would even be illegal if it were coming out of the McCain campaign's budget, rather than the RNC's. And it is paired with a consistent pattern of Palin using other people's money to support her and her family's preferred lifestyle.

I'm no Palin fan, but seriously, don't underestimate how judgemental the world is about a woman who doesn't dress well.

Again, this idea keeps coming up that you can't dress well without spending six figures. I assure you that only rich country-club women and gay men can tell when someone is wearing designer clothes.

Sarah's desire for high couture goes back a dozen years. Some weeks ago I came across this old story from the Anchorage Daily News on some blog that I can't recall; it was amusing but I really didn't think much about it. In retrospect, I think it says a lot about her, and how she has taken advantage of the "opportunities" that have recently come her way:

http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/513604.html

Alaskans line up for a whiff of Ivana (April 3, 1996)
By Tom Bell / Anchorage Daily News

Editor's note: This story was originally published April 3, 1996

Sarah Palin, a commercial fisherman from Wasilla, told her husband on Tuesday she was driving to Anchorage to shop at Costco. Instead, she headed straight for Ivana.

And there, at J.C. Penney's cosmetic department, was Ivana, the former Mrs. Donald Trump, sitting at a table next to a photograph of herself. She wore a light-colored pantsuit and pink fingernail polish. Her blonde hair was coiffed in a bouffant French twist.

''We want to see Ivana,'' said Palin, who admittedly smells like salmon for a large part of the summer, ''because we are so desperate in Alaska for any semblance of glamour and culture.'

......

Hey, if you smell like salmon, nothing beats a $75K spree at Neiman Marcus to take it away!

And it is paired with a consistent pattern of Palin using other people's money to support her and her family's preferred lifestyle.

As I understand it, she isn't keeping the clothes.
In general, though, I think politicians and campaign personnel have a lot of ways to augment their lifestyle on someone else's dime. Housing (like governor's mansions), travel, private planes, all the perks.
I want campaigns to have to pay taxes on the donations they receive. I think it would make them treat it less like free money, and it would benefit everybody in the country.
No other business gets half a billion tax-free dollars to spend.

"obama's campaign is spending unprecedented amounts of money in this campaign, none of it on you either."

i think you are also a little confused.

millions of supporters are spending unprecedented amounts of money on him.,,,and much has already come out of this campaign for us.
aside from working in hopeful unity for a collective goal, he has succeeded in creating a kindredness among many groups of people, helped through volunteerism to create states without borders, set an example of great courage, has tried to help us to address issues of race while enduring much criticism, has helped to repair some of the cynicism and hopelessness that has been brought to bear, has raised up our reputation in other countries, enthused and inspired a new generation and has reinstated the values of decency, intelligence and calm to a nation that now lives on the edges of either numbness or hysteria.
whatever may happen, barack obama has given us much for our donations and efforts. he is a beloved and inspiring human being.

millions of supporters are spending unprecedented amounts of money on him.,,,and much has already come out of this campaign for us.

But that's because you like him. So any dollar spent is worth it to you, no matter how he spends it. It goes to the goal of getting him elected, so you feel he is spending it on you.

The argument that Palin is wasting RNC money to get elected is based on the fact that you hate her. But people that donate to the RNC want to see McCain/Palin elected and they feel they way you do about Obama.

whatever may happen, barack obama has given us much for our donations and efforts. he is a beloved and inspiring human being.

Oh, heavens.

"but that's because you like him. so any dollar spent is worth it to you, no matter how he spends it."

that is not true.
if obama were spending the money he received in careless and squandering ways, creating a campaign built on hate, negativity and lavishness, you can be sure i, and others, would not be giving scarcee and hard-earned money and time to him.

"oh heavens"

that is right.
i am thanking the lucky stars, that at this dispirited time, with little good presently around us, this campaign brings people together with hope, inclusiveness and best intentions.

I have to agree with whoever it was who pointed out how tough the American public can be on female candidates for office--hell, they're even tough on the first ladies! Anyone remember the time when people would make fun of Hilary's dowdy appearance when she was living in the white house? I certainly do, and I was only a kid back then.

I have to say I think it's ridiculous that this is how the campaign chooses to spend their money, but the fact of the matter is, when people donate to the campaign, they are entrusting the people in charge of it to spend the funding as they see fit; seeing as how McCain has put all his eggs in the Palin basket, maybe they saw a Palin spruce-up as in the campaign's best interest.

Which leads me to my next point: would you agree that the people who are actually donating to McCain have followed his campaign and have some idea what he's about? If so, maybe they should have expected something like this to happen sooner or later...

And finally, I just wish there was some other way for people to campaign...maybe one day, with all the advances of the internets they won't have to spend hundreds of millions of hard-earned american dollars on political pandering and playacting. One can only hope. It just makes me sad to think what could have been acheived if people were donating this money to charities and causes rather than an election.

(yes, i know this is an illogical argument-for now- but one can dream!)

What's with the gratuitious dig at beet farmers?

If you look at Gov. Palin's pics from before here Veep nomination, you'll see she's always been something of a fashion plate. She has excellent taste, IMO.

The McCain camp screwed up the explanation, though. They should have told their donors that they intended to auction off the clothes after the election and recoup their investment, maybe make a profit.

So, when she loses, who get's the clothes and accessories? Is that like a game show parting gift?

But... the fact that Sarah looks fabulous was the entire point of the choice.

Her wardrobe is just a marketing expediture.

If Moose-a-lini keeps the clothes after the epic fail of an election, she will have to declare them as income and pay taxes on them. Will be interesting to follow up on that.
All this talk about keeping up appearances and presentation and what not - I think it is stunning how Bible Spice's rallies completely ape the template of Amway rallies. They both do the exact same things with the big video screen projections, the smoke machines, the video build up of the limo driving in, even the same ridiculous "Eye Of The Tiger" theme song. Gotta be hiring the same people.

This from the same Democrats who couldn't be bothered to look into the expenditures of Al Sharptons Presidential campaign, when he was spending his contributors money on the finest hotels suites, room service, multi-thousand dollar suits, etc.

Sharpton stayed at the Mansion on Turtle Creek, the bill came to $3,264.11 for one night.

In July, Mr. Sharpton spent $7,343.20 at the Four Seasons in Los Angeles for a three-day stay.

Ohh, right, he's an Obamaman...were not allowed to question the Obamanation.

jacqueline,
I still find your smoked too much dope on Obama facinating.

Obama is not, and never has been an inclusive, big tent guy. He's been a hard left wing, soak the rich, take their money and give it to people that will support and vote for me.

You look at all his career from the Annenberg Challenge, to SEnator, he doled out money not based on the needs of the poor, but on the needs of his own political support.

He was more then happy to give money to groups that were very rich if they supported him and very happy to ignore the needy and give money based on political support.

The Obama you seem to believe in has never existed.

Please, cite one thing Obama has done...that doesn't come directly from an Obama campaign spokesmen in which it wasn't directly in his best political interest at the time.

Go back and look at where he did invest money in poorer areas, nothing got done, nothing got better, things got worse, money got taken and the poor got poorer.

I am still amazed that anyone can believe that the Federal Government is their great savior and if we just had the right President everything will be great.

You seriously need to look back at and invest in yourselves...not in politicians, politicians have never, ever fixed anything, nor anyone.

If you look at Obamas associations/alliances with Ayers, Wright, Khalidi, Rezko, Al-Mansour, etc. what we find is Obama had no moral center of his own, he never stood up for you against these radicals, and he hooked onto anything that would promote himself.

Go back and look at where he did invest money in poorer areas, nothing got done, nothing got better, things got worse, money got taken and the poor got poorer.

I would presume that, like many poor cities such as Newark, the South Side of Chicago is likely safer and better economically than it was back in the 80s. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

You can credit Obama with having a hand in this or not, but that's what it is.

If anything, Obama's weakness is that he believes in all of this "we're all one America" stuff a bit too strongly, and is a bit too naive about the fact that some parts of America exist to spite the other part. On the other hand, the proof is in the pudding: it is the Republicans who are suffering for trying to claim that Obama is unAmerican, and it is Obama who is winning by promoting a unifying political message that "we're all in this together."

Go sell crazy somewhere else, TooStupidToUseAPseudonym. No one wants to hear your unhinged, dishonest anti-Obama ravings. Save it for the Thanksgiving dinner table, when your family will feel socially obligated to listen to your rants.

Working 10 hours a day, 7 days a week it would take a lettuce picker 300 days to make $150K.

"It was reported Cindy McCain wore a $400K outfit to the convention - you have to have known the priority of these folks."

If I recall correctly, most of that was jewelry, not clothing. The actual clothing involved was on the order of a few thousand dollars. Still a lot, but nowhere near as much as the entire ensemble.

I love how our trolls just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge how damaging this is -- frantically trying to bring in countless irrelevancies and side attacks rather than discuss the real issue.

Sorry, guys, but the RNC and the McCain campaign screwed up. This was a monumentally stupid, and completely unnecessary, thing to do. Spending this kind of money in this environment is horrendously tone-deaf politically.

"This from the same Democrats who couldn't be bothered to look into the expenditures of Al Sharptons Presidential campaign"

ROFL.... Q.E.D.

Don't you just love these morons? I *so* want the McCain campaign to go with this counterattack on the national news.

"So, when she loses, who get's the clothes and accessories?"

Supposedly, they go to charity:

"It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."

"The argument that Palin is wasting RNC money to get elected is based on the fact that you hate her."

Nah, it's based on the political reality that this was monumentally stupid. I could care less whether Palin wastes your money or not. That's between you and Palin. I'm just laughing my ass off at how dumb the McCain campaign was to do this.

And, of course, there is this little thing called reality where people don't have to spend $150,000 on clothes to get elected. There may well be a double standard for women when it comes to judging their hair, makeup, and dress, but *nobody* is going to believe that you need to spend $150,000 to look good, particularly not other women.

There are two problems with how much the RNC seems to have spent.

One is that they don't appear to have generated a consistent narrative for Palin. If they want to present her as a hockey mom, she should look like a hockey mom. I can see how this involves spending money on clothes, but I would argue they've invested a lot of money on the wrong kinds of clothes.

When Catherine Bach was buying clothes for her character on the Dukes of Hazzard, she made sure that everything she bought was available at Sears or JC Penney's. She would have looked ridiculous otherwise. The fact that the RNC is showing less judgement than a TV actress tells you everything you need to know.

Maybe the Republicans should have hired the Sutter family as consultants. They sent six brothers to the NHL, so they know what a real hockey mom looks like. I can picture the Sutters with $150,000 worth of hockey equipment, but not designer clothes.

The clothing issue may be small potatoes, but it's part of the larger problem the Republicans have had establishing a coherent message this year. They're pounding the message that Obama is scary, but is he a scary Muslim or a scary Christian? Who knows? They still haven't decided whether or not to bring up Rev. Wright. That should have been decided months ago.

Similarly with Palin. If she's supposed to be a dynamic young woman with executive experience then sure, put her in Armani. If she's supposed to be a working class hockey mom, she should look like one. It's true as some people said that women are judged by how they dress, but what the RNC has done with Palin is actually counterproductive to what they want.

The other thing is the questions it raises about how the Republicans are prioritizing their expenses. Right now they are looking at big losses in the House, a landslide for Obama, and maybe a supermajority for the Democrats in the Senate.

I guarantee you that if the Republicans end up with 39 Senators and Elizabeth Dole loses her seat by 5 votes, Republicans everywhere will be asking themselves what they could have done differently to get those five votes. That shopping spree in Minnesota is bound to come up. I guarantee it.

The last honest Democrat:

http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html

This makes me sad. I like Palin's outfits, and prefer them to HRC's probably equally expensive pantsuits (the exception being that faboo Armani gray/rose print knee-length jacket she wore after her victory in NH).

But politicians are not movie stars used as free-standing models for designers, so if they want to go couture they should use their own money and as high-ranked public officials they can probably afford it. Just as Michelle Obama can probably afford her $1200 Thakoon and Narciso Rodriguez and Cindy McCain can afford her who-knows-how-much Chanel and Oscar de la Renta outfits. It befits the circles they ran in before the presidential campaign and there's no reason to believe that they needed campaign money to be able to dress this way.

I also have to say that there is a sizeable difference between the way Cindy McCain dresses and how all the other women in these campaigns dress. With Palin, and esp. with Michelle Obama, most people who pay attention to that sort of thing say that no matter the price tag it seems like an ordinary woman can ape their outfits for a fraction of the price and still look fresh and professional. Cindy's outfits, on the other hand, look like they had to be assembled onto her body by a couture suit machine for country club ladies.

Finally, lest we think this kind of clothing scrutiny only falls on women, it's worth pointing out that we've had a fair share of caring about what the men looked like. It's not so long ago that people gossiped about earth tones and tie-less collars and Ferragamo shoes and flag pins. Or that McCain should use something other than a green screen as a backdrop for his speeches. Or that Huckabee lost a lot of weight before he ran for office.

(Also, I doubt it's because Donatella Versace is suddenly interested in American politics that she made a men's suit collection inspired by Obama. More like: wow, that guy knows how to wear a suit!)

Our estimation of individuals is based on their appearance and what they own. This is an inherent part of our status/identity-obsessed consumer culture. Until this changes, complaining about how much people on the public eye spend on their outfits is useless and, at worst, hypocritical.

"The last honest Democrat"

Orson Scott Card is a nutcase and has been for years. He supported Bush in 2004, encouraged opposition to then-Senator John Edwards in his home state, defends Fox News, is virulently anti-gay, is gung-ho on the Iraq war, thinks that global warming is overblown, thinks that the birth control pill has led to an increase in crime, and openly encourages people to vote Republican, just as he did in early November, 2006.

Moreover, the opening statement of his letter is flatly incorrect:

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

That particular line of bullshit has been debunked time and time again. This line is even more egregiously false:

"One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules."

Not only did Bush not "try repeatedly to tighten up the rules," he actively opposed all such attempts and insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac take on those oh-so-risky loans that he decries.

In short, the essay is completely false. And his idea of what a "fact" is is completely bogus. This was just one long line of long-discredited crap.

It makes me happy that so many trolls have been drawn into such a useless thread.

ta ta!

Two assumptions that seem to commonly appear in this thread (and on this blog, in general):

1) Everyone who expresses a differing opinion than the one expressed on this blog is a troll. A troll is someone who deliberately tries to anger people, just for "lulz," or is just so annoying in the sense that he or she spews ad hominem attacks. You may disagree with some commenters on this thread. However, you will never find that "our shared political views only" thread that you so desire. Listen to people's arguments. Some people have made silly insults, but others have provided arguments about why Palin shouldn't be condemned, in this case. You are welcome to disagree. That doesn't necessarily mean that the posters are trolls.

2) If you defend a person at all about any particular issue, that means you suppor that person or his or her candidacy. I did not vote for McCain. My money wasn't wasted by the RNC, because I didn't send them any. But I try to evaluate every contention on its merits, rather than falling back on "if the guy on my team does it, it must be right." Again, feel welcome to criticize Palin. But when criticism or praise can be predictably determined before the information is presented, that is a sign you have stopped using your minds.

Please don't say, "Well the right does it, too." Of course many people on the right do it. So do many on the left. That is no excuse for renouncing rational thought, in the name of political parity.

Tyro, can you learn to write? Palin is not complaining about the "value" of elites, whatever that might mean. Their net worth? She is complaining about the elites. There is no contradiction between her views, however conservative they may be, and her wish to be fashionable in a cosmopolitan way. The elites themselves are only consumers of high fashion, and usually not its creators. Just like Palin. And the phrase "I would presume....".. Where are we, in an English gentlemen's club?

Michelle Obama was also seen on the campaign trail in Gap and H&M. I'd love to see Cindy or Sarah don something so downmarket.